Corporate social responsibility focusing on Starbucks Essay

Corporate social responsibility focusing on Starbucks - Essay Example Starbucks is involved in many CSR initiatives ranging from philanthropy to service projects. The company is keen on enhancing ethical sourcing programs and environmental concerns. The organization has various NGOs and CSR programs which follow different ethical and social standards. In order to successfully achieve this, the company has developed an effective communication strategy that fits the needs of the various stakeholders. Organizations are increasingly being pressured by their environment to become social citizens while still being profitable. Rather than being a differentiation strategy, acting ethical and social responsibility has become an expectation. Organizations have to achieve legitimacy through responding to the expectations of the community. The company uses both online and multimedia communication features to address the expectations of the stakeholders. The company has suffered from stakeholder skeptism (Forehand and Grier, 2003). The company was accused of being unrealistic and extremely philanthropic. In order for the stakeholders to develop confidence, the company has increased transparency and decreased the chances of miss communication. The company ensures that there are no self-beneficial motives when carrying out the social responsibility and ethics program. In doing this, the company has stressed the need for engaging in the social issues that counter the skeptics from the stakeholders. Ethical/social issues targeting stakeholders Starbucks is sentient that its stakeholders have diverse prospects and requirements (Morsing and Schultz, 2006). The company has explicitly tailored its CSR program to meet these needs. Starbucks is using transparency and philanthropy to target the stakeholders. This includes supporting coffee farmers in Mexico and Ethiopia. The company has developed programs that emphasize on the long-term commitment to the CRS and ethics initiatives (Forehand and Grier, 2003). The shareholders of the leading organizations have been consistent in their shift from maximizing profits to increasing value. Companies have to balance people, planet and profit in a globalised market (Schwartz and Carroll, 2003). More power relies on the stakeholders to demand increased transparency and organizational communication. The stakeholders expect the companies to document and acknowledge their impact in the environment (Saksson and Jorgensen, 2010). The organizational ethical behaviors have come under sharp focus (Forehand and Grier, 2003). CRS is perceived to be a morally and ethically correct approach in which all the shareholders stand to gain. The modern corporations have a major part of their assets being the intangible parts i.e. the reputation, goodwill and human capita (Morsing and Schultz, 2006). Therefore, CSR approaches are significant for the achievement and legitimization of any successful corporation. Stakeholders perceive an organization based on the reputation and goodwill the company enjoys (Schwar tz and Carroll, 2003). For CSR initiatives in Starbucks to be successful, the corporate communication tools must be interpreted in the right ways (Forehand and Grier, 2003). The process of establishing and maintain the mutual relations between the public and an organization is crucial (Morsing and Schultz, 2006). Many organizations are facing a dilemma on how to handle stakeholders (Preble, 2005). Organizations have to achieve maximum profits and at the same time meet the demands of the stakeholders (Saksson and Jorgensen, 2010). The company has stressed on both economic and ethical motives while executing the CSR program. Analysis on multiple factors The ethical motives are salient and are emphasized through ethical organizations (Preble, 2005). Starbucks has to meet certain standards in its value chain. The strategic team of the company acknowledges that having a bad reputation has negative implications to the stakeholders

Assigment 2 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Assigment 2 - Essay Example The Texas State Senate and United States Senate allow their members to filibuster bills. This paper analyzes the similarities and differences between Texas state senate and United States senate filibustering. Similarities In the US, filibustering is a powerful legislative tool and it has been used to influence many senate proceedings and outcomes. For instance in the united states senate, most major legislations require over 60% votes before being nominated for a house debate. While filibustering may be viewed as a democratic move in most senates, most people believe that filibustering is negative and uncalled for in any proceeding. This is evident in both the US and Texas state senate’s, where parliamentarians have created bills to stop filibustering. Filibustering has also attracted positive criticism in both the US and Texas state senate. For instance filibustering has been used to shun contentious bills from being passed without prior participation of all senate members. F or instance, the abortion bill that threatened to criminalize abortion and instruct the closure of all abortion clinics has been delayed due to the existence of filibustering in the Texas. Thus, in both the US ant Texas state senate, filibustering has positive and negative criticism. Senate Rule XXII, the US state senate allows certain senators to prolong a bill or a speech for as long as they can. The law recognizes the necessity to prolong certain bills. This is usually true in both the US and Texas senate. In the US senate, prolong a house debate was an open practice until the house of representative passed a permanent rule in 1842 to limit the length of debates. Similar measures have been taken in the Texas state senate to regulate house debates. There are many uncertainties in filibustering bills as administered in both senates. The main issue attached to filibustering, is the determination of the length of a debate. According to critics, it is impossible to determine or out ru le, the length of a bill based on the filibustering policy. For instance, it is impossible to define how long a long speech is. Lack of a clear-cut definition on the length of a debate has been applied by critics to shoot down filibustering bills. Lack of clear-cut policies on filibustering is evident in both the US and Texas state senate. The passage of filibustering legislations has not been welcomed by most senators who use lengthy discussions or debates to prevent or influence the passage of bills. The issue of filibustering is commonly associated with US politics. In both the Texas and US senates, republicans are believed to be the main filibusters. The political association is historic and it has minimal implication on bill passage. However, senate proceedings are influenced by the US senate. More so, the bill of rights and other contentious issues are often ruled out depending on political affiliations. The rules of both houses are clear on the issue of filibustering and neit her of the houses identifies filibustering as a political issue. Indeed, both senates recognize filibustering as important in any proceedings. The cause of filibustering in both the US and Texas senate are similar and they are protected by the law. For instance the in the US senate, most common filibustering occur when a senator attempts to delay or obstruct a vote or a bill. On such